NationStates Jolt Archive

Who here serves or has served in the military? Give us your country of service, branch, rank, job description, any action you've seen, and why joined it.
Also, if you plan on joining, you can talk about that too.

I'm just curious :)

I was in the TA, Royal Artillery. 209 Battery, 103 Regiment.

I was only in for about 2 years and left as a lance jack.

I joined because a girl I fancied was joining and wanted moral support, which, it turns out, wasn't the best reason. I left when I got bored and found out she was sleeping with a female full screw.

The battery was air defense when I joined, using the Javelin AA missile but quickly converted to the 105mm light field gun.

I never had to serve abroad, I left just before the whole Afghan/Iraq thing reall kicked off.

I thought about it.

Then decided that I'd rather live on my feet than die on my knees.

I thought about it.

Then decided that I'd rather live on my feet than die on my knees.

That makes no sense...

I considered a career in either the Royal Army, Royal Navy, or Merchant Navy. The plan was I'd join a service after I'd finished university, as I wanted to be an officer.

However, my asthma has never cleared up, and seems unlikely to leave me anytime soon.

I'm also partly colour blind, apparently. So that rules out most career options for me in the navies anyway.

So if my asthma clears up before I'm 25, I'm ready to enrol at Sandhurst. I'm not optimistic.

Why did I want to join? Off the top of my head:


I want to wear a uniform, secure in the knowledge I'm entitled to wear it.
I want to work in a career that directly serves my country.
I want to protect people.
I want to lead.
Did I mention I want the uniform...?

That makes no sense...

No. It makes a lot of sense.

served from 1999 to 2005. Satellite communications
1 year Maryland for Training. 2 years in Korea 3 years in Maryland presidential communications. Fun job. best choice I ever made. I didn't have to go to fighting as the presidential communications position protected me. The only person who did go to Iraq was was a chief warrant officer who was about to retire and wanted a combat patch before he did.

Fartsniffage thank god I worked with the British military or I would have never know what a full screw was.

Had I joined in my youth, they'd have sent me to Vietnam. No thanks.

Had I joined in my youth, they'd have sent me to Vietnam. No thanks.

Damn Dirty HIPPIE

I'm planning on joining. Dunno which branch, but military service goes back a long time in my family.

Nope. No one ever orders me to kill. I'm quite happy being a coward anyday - at least i'm a coward who can live with himself.

No. It makes a lot of sense.

How so? Explain to me how serving in the military is "dieing on your knees"

How so? Explain to me how serving in the military is "dieing on your knees"

Another Damn dirt hippie. It is plainly obvious. Only damn dirty hippies cant understand it.

How so? Explain to me how serving in the military is "dieing on your knees"

First of all, you have to do what everyone tells you to do. That's called "obeying orders".

Then there's the part where people try to kill you. Some are called "enemies" and they try to kill you directly. Others called "officers" try to kill you indirectly by sending you into harm's way.

Dying on your knees.

First of all, you have to do what everyone tells you to do. That's called "obeying orders".

Then there's the part where people try to kill you. Some are called "enemies" and they try to kill you directly. Others called "officers" try to kill you indirectly by sending you into harm's way.

Dying on your knees.

You could be the officer. That way you get to send others to die on their knees while you drink cocktails on your feet until you fall on to your back.

You could be the officer. That way you get to send others to die on their knees while you drink cocktails on your feet until you fall on to your back.

/threadwin

First of all, you have to do what everyone tells you to do. That's called "obeying orders".

Then there's the part where people try to kill you. Some are called "enemies" and they try to kill you directly. Others called "officers" try to kill you indirectly by sending you into harm's way.

Dying on your knees.

Do you have a job?

You could be the officer. That way you get to send others to die on their knees while you drink cocktails on your feet until you fall on to your back.

Ah yes. That would have been my fifth reason for enrolling. :D

You could be the officer. That way you get to send others to die on their knees while you drink cocktails on your feet until you fall on to your back.

I can do that without sending people to their death.

Do you have a job?

Yes.

I can do that without sending people to their death.

Yes, but are you being paid and does someone give you a snazzy uniform?

Everyone looks better in a uniform.

Yes, but are you being paid and does someone give you a snazzy uniform.

Everyone looks better in a uniform.

Listen to the bombardier, he know's what he's talking about. I think you'd probably look great in No.2 Dress.

C'mon, why don't you take the King's Shilling, lad?

Yes, but are you being paid and does someone give you a snazzy uniform.

Everyone looks better in a uniform.

That's true. And I do have the required education to be immediately bumped into officer staus in some armed forces.

Perhaps I could send my brave enlisted soldiers out to get drink mixes instead of getting their heads blown off?

Yes.

So it is safe to assume that you do what your boss(es) tell you to do?

Other than the order from a military commander being likely to include "go out there and kill the enemy", something which you are highly unlikely to encounter in a civilian job, how is there a difference.

By your rational you have chosen living on your knees over the possibility of dieing on your knees, not living on your feet over dieing on your knees.

If your problem with military service is a moral opposition to killing you should just say so, rather than trying to imply that soldiers are cowards, which is what the meaning of your little phrase that you used incorrectly is.

I implied straight away that I'm not a killer. :p

That's true. And I do have the required education to be immediately bumped into officer staus in some armed forces.

Perhaps I could send my brave enlisted soldiers out to get drink mixes instead of getting their heads blown off?

A tip for your new command.

Never, ever, give squaddies money and send them in the direction of licensed premises. You think Iraq is a cluster fuck? You've never seen a bar after a decent number of drunken soldiers have hit it.

So it is safe to assume that you do what your boss(es) tell you to do?

Other than the order from a military commander being likely to include "go out there and kill the enemy", something which you are highly unlikely to encounter in a civilian job, how is there a difference.

By your rational you have chosen living on your knees over the possibility of dieing on your knees, not living on your feet over dieing on your knees.

If your problem with military service is a moral opposition to killing you should just say so, rather than trying to imply that soldiers are cowards, which is what the meaning of your little phrase that you used incorrectly is.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Right. My job is like life in the military. That's hilarious. I'm going to tell my bosses that right now. They'll think it's great!

Here's a big difference: I can say "no" to my bosses, and I do. I don't have to follow orders, or get up at 5 AM, or wash the latrine if I make a mistake, or wear some outfit that someone else has chosen. If I leave my job right now, no authority will come arrest me. I don't live on my knees just because I sell my services.

And if I wanted to say that soldiers are cowards, I would just say it. I refuse to mince words. I don't know how you inferred that I was making some sort of offensive generalisation about soldiers, and I don't hold myself responsible for your misunderstanding.

For the first quote I would just like to say if joining the army is not for you then you are no coward, the man who stands by his beliefs is the man strongest of all, the man who fights for himself and not someone elses morals (e.g iraq) is a free man and, a man who can live with himself the exact opposite of a coward, a truely brave and dignified man.

As regards the seccond quote, from birt we fight to stand, what does the army mean service, and the word service derives from the word serve and thus servant, once i the army your bow to someonelses will a die that way.

Never wanted to join any sevice as i hate my country, its policies and the army itself (no offense to any patriots, personal oppinion) i have however considered making my own rebel group to fight politically (not necessarily with violence) for my own rights and freedoms

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Right. My job is like life in the military. That's hilarious. I'm going to tell my bosses that right now. They'll think it's great!

Here's a big difference: I can say "no" to my bosses, and I do. I don't have to follow orders, or get up at 5 AM, or wash the latrine if I make a mistake, or wear some outfit that someone else has chosen. If I leave my job right now, no authority will come arrest me. I don't live on my knees just because I sell my services.

And if I wanted to say that soldiers are cowards, I would just say it. I refuse to mince words. I don't know how you inferred that I was making some sort of offensive generalisation about soldiers, and I don't hold myself responsible for your misunderstanding.

And you can say no to orders in the military as well, depending upon the nature of the orders you may or may not face consequences for it...

Since you obviously have no clue about the meaning of the phrase you used you should stop using using it, and since you have shown that you have no clue about the military you should shut your mouth about the subject.

As far as how I came to the conclusion that you were saying something offensive about soldiers it is because you were, thus my advice to stop using that phrase since you obviously do not know what it means.

What job do you have where you never have to do what your bosses tell you to do?

I considered a career in either the Royal Army, Royal Navy, or Merchant Navy. The plan was I'd join a service after I'd finished university, as I wanted to be an officer.

However, my asthma has never cleared up, and seems unlikely to leave me anytime soon.

I'm also partly colour blind, apparently. So that rules out most career options for me in the navies anyway.

So if my asthma clears up before I'm 25, I'm ready to enrol at Sandhurst. I'm not optimistic.

Why did I want to join? Off the top of my head:


I want to wear a uniform, secure in the knowledge I'm entitled to wear it.
I want to work in a career that directly serves my country.
I want to protect people.
I want to lead.
Did I mention I want the uniform...?

excellent reasons, especially the uniform part. a man in uniform (who is entitled to wear the uniform) is sexy.

good luck on the asthma thing.

Since you obviously have no clue about the meaning of the phrase you used you should stop using using it, and since you have shown that you have no clue about the military you should shut your mouth about the subject.

Let's not start a fight over this now.

What job do you have where you never have to do what your bosses tell you to do?

Pretty much any. You always have the right to say no. Yeah it might cost you your job, but at least you won't get thrown in prison.

Now to answer the question in the OP (at least partially) yes, I was in the military Army National Guard as a tanker and then active duty in the Marine Corps as an infantryman (role of tank-killer), as to any other details such as rank, it's none of your business other than I was enlisted not officer.

Let's not start a fight over this now.
too late I think
Pretty much any. You always have the right to say no. Yeah it might cost you your job, but at least you won't get thrown in prison.

So, in other words none?

I have no problem with people choosing not to serve in the military, its certainly not for everyone, I do however have a problem with people saying or implying that all soldiers are cowards which is exactly what GoG did, even if he is ignorant of the fact.

Let's not start a fight over this now.



Pretty much any. You always have the right to say no. Yeah it might cost you your job, but at least you won't get thrown in prison.

I'm not sure it's as clear cut as you imply. Losing your job could result in you losing your house or being unable to support your family, especially given the shitty reference you'll get after being fired will hinder you getting a new job.

The kind of order you would refuse in the military is likely to be an illegal one, you won't end up in prison for this as you are required to disobey an illegal order. The unpleasant orders such as running or cleaning toilets you would probably follow in a regular job anyway.

I currently in the Army National Guard, Corps of Engineers, road/bridge construction unit. I'm an officer and I want to know where the hell all these drinks are that I'm supposed to be sipping while sending my men out...

I currently in the Army National Guard, Corps of Engineers, road/bridge construction unit. I'm an officer and I want to know where the hell all these drinks are that I'm supposed to be sipping while sending my men out...

You have to requisition them from supply...

And you can say no to orders in the military as well, depending upon the nature of the orders you may or may not face consequences for it...

But I don't have to go to a court-martial or risk imprisonment. I can just say no.

Since you obviously have no clue about the meaning of the phrase you used you should stop using using it, and since you have shown that you have no clue about the military you should shut your mouth about the subject.

:rolleyes:

As far as how I came to the conclusion that you were saying something offensive about soldiers it is because you were, thus my advice to stop using that phrase since you obviously do not know what it means.

I love the way you know what I meant to say better than I do. You obviously associated the idea of kneeling with cowardice, even though I explained that being on your knees was a sign of obedience. But if you want to continue to pretend I meant cowardice, go ahead.

What job do you have where you never have to do what your bosses tell you to do?

What does this have to do with anything?

I currently in the Army National Guard, Corps of Engineers, road/bridge construction unit. I'm an officer and I want to know where the hell all these drinks are that I'm supposed to be sipping while sending my men out...

I don't know about the US but in the UK the drinks in the mess are stupidly cheap, go buy some.

If you're really bright enough to be an officer then you'll find some reason/excuse to be in there rather than the field.

Well meh. my reason for not fighting is my moral views on life. I do not imply soldiers are cowards, nor do I imply that they are fools. I am simply saying I will not join the army.

And you can say no to orders in the military as well, depending upon the nature of the orders you may or may not face consequences for it...But I don't have to go to a court-martial or risk imprisonment. I can just say no.
Nor did I


Since you obviously have no clue about the meaning of the phrase you used you should stop using using it, and since you have shown that you have no clue about the military you should shut your mouth about the subject.:rolleyes:
See above


As far as how I came to the conclusion that you were saying something offensive about soldiers it is because you were, thus my advice to stop using that phrase since you obviously do not know what it means.
I love the way you know what I meant to say better than I do. You obviously associated the idea of kneeling with cowardice, even though I explained that being on your knees was a sign of obedience. But if you want to continue to pretend I meant cowardice, go ahead.
Where did I say anything about "knowing better than you what you meant to say?" Again you show your ignorance and prove my point.


What job do you have where you never have to do what your bosses tell you to do?
What does this have to do with anything?
Any job you have you have to do what your bosses tell you to do, civilian jobs may be more lenient about consequences than the military, but if you want to keep the job you have to do the job...

Well meh. my reason for not fighting is my moral views on life. I do not imply soldiers are cowards, nor do I imply that they are fools. I am simply saying I will not join the army.

And thusly I have no problem with you...

I strongly considered a career as an Army officer but severe allergies and a history of asthma made it highly unlikely I'd have been accepted.

And thusly I have no problem with you...

Nor I with you. *Bows*

:fluffle:


So...
Who missed me?
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff315/Sarothai/Smileys/EMOAYangryA005HL.gif http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff315/Sarothai/Smileys/winkingsmiley.gif

Nor did I

Right. Some officer gave you an order, and you said no, and then you all had a laugh and he politely asked you why not, and you chatted with him about it, and then you shot some brown people. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Where did I say anything about "knowing better than you what you meant to say?" Again you show your ignorance and prove my point.

That bit where you keep accusing me of saying soldiers are cowards. I didn't say that. You think I did. Now, if you are right and I am wrong, then that would mean that you somehow knew better than I did what I meant by that line.

Any job you have you have to do what your bosses tell you to do, civilian jobs may be more lenient about consequences than the military, but if you want to keep the job you have to do the job...

Just because a job shares some similarities with the military does not make them equal. A rabbit shares some similarities with a human. That doesn't mean the Easter Bunny gets to vote.

I don't know about the US but in the UK the drinks in the mess are stupidly cheap, go buy some.

If you're really bright enough to be an officer then you'll find some reason/excuse to be in there rather than the field.

Hahaha, my NCO's would never let me just hang out in the FOB even if I had the thought.

well i am the pres of the united states of cleireach and yes i was in the us army for almost 16 yrs active duty no reserves or nat guard i was the real army 24/7 and i loved it and i am very proud to have servef also yes alot of bs went on but thats life ....i was an 88m (truck driver)an62e(hvy construction equipment operator)and i was a 19k (m1a1 abrams tank crewman thanku for asking and yes i do miss it and i am tring to get back in.....hoooooah!

Yay! Fun thread time!

*puts chin in hands in expectation*

But I don't have to go to a court-martial or risk imprisonment. I can just say no.



You can say no to anything. And worded correctly you can not be court martial. If it is a moral issue your fine, after the incident is over you may have some training and classes over why the order was legal or not legal(and if so you normally get a medal).

Another way is to simply say I do not know how to perform what you request. Someone else will have to do it and there will be trouble. But not a court martial form of trouble since they cant prove what you know or don't know. Depending on what it was you may get a demotion or kicked out from the military. However, being kicked out for stupidity is honorable. Basically what you would face in the civilian world. The only difference is you cant tell your commanding officer" I don't feel like it"

I thought about it.

Then decided that I'd rather live on my feet than die on my knees.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Right. Some officer gave you an order, and you said no, and then you all had a laugh and he politely asked you why not, and you chatted with him about it, and then you shot some brown people. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
1. nope no polite chat, but I didn't get court martialed...
2. As far as I know I have never killed anyone.


That bit where you keep accusing me of saying soldiers are cowards. I didn't say that. You think I did. Now, if you are right and I am wrong, then that would mean that you somehow knew better than I did what I meant by that line.
Again you show that you don't know the meaning of the phrase you used, and thusly you should stop using it.


Just because a job shares some similarities with the military does not make them equal. A rabbit shares some similarities with a human. That doesn't mean the Easter Bunny gets to vote.
your complaint was that in the military you have to follow orders, well you have to do that in civilian jobs as well, so the fact that in that sense they are the same has everything do do with this discussion.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

So, you are just as ignorant as GoG? Or are you intentionally being offensive?

2. As far as I know I have never killed anyone.
That's disturbing. Because I know I've never killed anyone.


your complaint was that in the military you have to follow orders, well you have to do that in civilian jobs as well, so the fact that in that sense they are the same has everything do do with this discussion.
Stop comparing a civilian job with a military job. You're comparing apples and astro-physics.

First of all, you have to do what everyone [sic] tells you to do. That's called "obeying orders".

Most jobs involve superiors.

Then there's the part where people try to kill you. Some are called "enemies" and they try to kill you directly. Others called "officers" try to kill you indirectly by sending you into harm's way.

That sounds like a policeman.

Dying on your knees.

No, risking life and limb for a cause which may or may not be believed in.

I wanted to join the forces, either Army or RAF with a view to joining the relevant intelligence corps (I've always had an interest in analysis of information/data). I seriously looked into it whilst in sixth form, with a view to possible sponsorship through Uni. I was interested in this for several reason, but mostly because I have always seen the forces as serving an important function in protecting and serving the country (this was before Iraq though, which I do have some issue with).

Why did I not? Well simply my eyesight has continued to deteriorate, so much so that I'm below even the minimum level they like people to be at and still serve. I was most unimpressed with my genetics.

Apparently, I'm as ignorant as GoG, if you prefer to think so. I do agree with the statement. If I don't show up to work, I may not have a job, but I won't be court marshaled, looking at possible jail time. I can be home with my family for holidays or any other day I choose without anyone dictating if that's possible. I live how I live, on my feet.

edited to add: My boss would never, ever send me into a situation where my health, safety or even life is compromised. Even if he did, I have a choice, with little repercussion, definitely no jail.

That's disturbing. Because I know I've never killed anyone.
Meh
Stop comparing a civilian job with a military job. You're comparing apples and astro-physics.
I was addressing GoG's assertion that only in the military do you have to do what you are told, which is patently false.



Apparently, I'm as ignorant as GoG, if you prefer to think so. I do agree with the statement. If I don't show up to work, I may not have a job, but I won't be court marshaled, looking at possible jail time. I can be home with my family for holidays or any other day I choose without anyone dictating if that's possible. I live how I live, on my feet.

edited to add: My boss would never, ever send me into a situation where my health, safety or even life is compromised. Even if he did, I have a choice, with little repercussion, definitely no jail.

A little bit of advice to those of you who are completely ignorant of what the military is like:
Stop trying to act like you have a clue, because you do not.

If I'd stayed in Germany, I would've had to go to mustering. It's likely that they would have rejected me, since they don't actually need conscripts anymore and do whatever they can to avoid taking them, but if they had taken me, I would've gone to the army. Panzergrenadiere, probably.

They put my dad into a mobile radar truck. That would've sucked.

In fact, other than shooting guns from time to time and riding tanks around, the whole thing would have sucked. Good thing I left.

I've never served in the military. The last person in my family to serve in the military did so in the First World War, and by the time he was eventually shipped overseas the war was over anyway. However, I do have a "Support the Troops" magnetic ribbon on the back of my car, and that, I feel, is just as large a sacrifice as actually serving.

I've never served in the military. The last person in my family to serve in the military did so in the First World War, and by the time he was eventually shipped overseas the war was over anyway. However, I do have a "Support the Troops" magnetic ribbon on the back of my car, and that, I feel, is just as large a sacrifice as actually serving.

With the cost of fuel these days and the extra weight in that magnetic ribbon, you may be right.

But to get to the point of the thread...

Did serve in the late 90's/early 80's. Actually, I did not serve. The saying then was " I have never served in the Armed Forces of the US nor any other government entity whatsoever".

However, did get to spend about 2 years in hot muggy beautiful Central America.

I want to join the Swiss Guard, mainly because i would get a silly outfit and a Halberd. Too bad I'm not Catholic, or Swiss.

That's disturbing. Because I know I've never killed anyone.

And the difference between 'as far as I know' and 'I know' is...?

USA, Pennsylvania National Guard, Headquarters Company, First Battalion, 111th Infantry Regiment. I'm a combat infantryman who hasn't seen any combat yet. My unit goes overseas in a year or so.
I'm currently a Private E-1, though I'm probably getting promoted to Private E-2. I'll know for sure this weekend. :D

I was in the US Navy. I served as an Electronic Warfare Technician aboard USS George Washington. My job was to prevent enemy missiles from hitting the ship. A nice low pressure job. ;)

Firstly, thanks a lot Ashmoria. I doubt I'll ever be rid of the Asthma if it hasn't left me by now, but thanks anyway.

Secondly, where's the old veteran of the board, Mr Celtlund? I'm sure he'd have a few things to say, and war stories to share.

First of all, you have to do what everyone tells you to do. That's called "obeying orders".

Then there's the part where people try to kill you. Some are called "enemies" and they try to kill you directly. Others called "officers" try to kill you indirectly by sending you into harm's way.

Dying on your knees.

If you're intelligent enought, you could get into a rate that's too valuable for combat. My son was a satellite communications electronics technician. They aren't sending anyone who can keep the electronics going into combat. My daughter was an intelligence analyst - she was locked up in a windowless room full of computers - nowhere near combat. Now she's a public health officer, as an epidemiologist she might have contact with some pretty nasty viruses and bacteria, but she'll be nowhere near a gun.

I point to my signature.

I point to my signature.

"Wow. That's like asking me if I want a 7oz filet mignon with asparagus and garlic mash OR a kick in the junk and a punch in the throat." --Intangelon
hmmm, a little vague...
Not sure how that answers the question...
:p

I'm signing up for the U.S. Army sometime in the next four months. Depends on if I can talk my mother into signing or not. If I can't, I'll have to wait a while. I'm going to be a tanker, though a bunch of people said I should attempt to become a counterintelligence agent or be a lab technician. :p

I'm signing up for the U.S. Army sometime in the next four months. Depends on if I can talk my mother into signing or not. If I can't, I'll have to wait a while. I'm going to be a tanker, though a bunch of people said I should attempt to become a counterintelligence agent or be a lab technician. :p

Tanks are fun though... :D

Tanks are fun though... :DThat's why I'm enlisting to be a tanker. :D

Corporal, USMC.

And bonus for you, they now have the bugs worked out of the abrams, unlike when I was in...
Not that I got to play with the Abrams, my national guard unit had the Patton...

If only the U.S. Army had had the sense to test the tank fully before accepting it (or gotten someone else to test it fully like the Marine Corps did) ;)

And bonus for you, they now have the bugs worked out of the abrams, unlike when I was in...;) Hopefully I'll get to play with the M1A2 SEP. :p

Why would anyone want to be a paid mercenary of Yankee global monopoly-capital and vicious imperialism? Military people are the height of scum.Life is vicious, unfair, etc. You either accept that, and move on, or whine about it.

Life is vicious, unfair, etc. You either accept that, and move on, or whine about it.

Don't poke the troll, it's bad form...

Right out of school I signed up for the military, and participated in the battle for Grozny. Didn't really have a choice, due to conscription[though it was a year away, and I could have gone to university instead]. After that, I signed up again and got deployed to the same area.

*Motor Rifle forces, BTR*

Don't poke the troll, it's bad form...I know, I know, but it's late and I'm incredibly bored.

Oh, so your just a tool of Yankee imperialism then. How about you piss off and go murder some babies then.

butthurt much?

US Marine Corp. MOS 02. Domestic, Iraq. pay grade O-3

US Marine Corp. MOS 02. Domestic, Iraq. pay grade O-3

Semper Fi, brother.

Again you show that you don't know the meaning of the phrase you used, and thusly you should stop using it.


Sorry man, I think that you don't know the meaning of the phrase.

To die on your feet would mean that you are dying while taking action. Living on your knees would imply that you're living in servitude, bowing down before the one you serve.

Hence why I decide against joining the marines right out of high school like I was going to. I like the idea of controlling my own destiny.

Where did I say anything about "knowing better than you what you meant to say?" Again you show your ignorance and prove my point.
Did you, or did you not, assume that the image evoked of being on one's knees is one of cowardice?

If your answer is yes, then you are in fact guilty of what you have been accused of.

Any job you have you have to do what your bosses tell you to do, civilian jobs may be more lenient about consequences than the military, but if you want to keep the job you have to do the job...
You can quite your civilian job without being brought up on charges.

You can quite your civilian job without being brought up on charges.

I'm also fairly certain that the partners will never ask me to kill someone.

They might WANT to. But they don't.

Never been in the military, but (fun fact time): In the netherlands compulsory military service is still a fact of life, however, the powers that be decided that as long as we arent at war, no new recruits will be called up. A few weeks after my 18th birthday i received a letter from the army, explaining the above to me, only they needed 4 pages to tell me that i didnt have to show up.

I'm currently a SGT (19D20D3FR) in the Michigan Army National Guard.

I was in OIF I with 3dACR from Apr 2003-Apr2004) in Ramadi and Al Asad as a guntruck crewmember, gunner and commander (at various times). I left federal active duty in March of 2004.

Currently I'm in the 1st Squadron of the 126th Cavalry Regiment of the Michigan Army National Guard. We're stationed in Kuwait where we escort third country national drivers (Indians, Fijians, Pakistanis, Georgians, etc) to various locales in southern Iraq. I'm the commander of one of these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1117), which is quite nice.

After this enlistment I'll be completely finished with the military, much as I do enjoy certain parts. I'll always enjoy being around (most) soldiers but I just can't bring myself to deal with the ever increasing bullshit anymore. I've been acting platoon sergeant for a couple of weeks now and the sheer amount of idiocy I'm calling out is immense. The amount of bullshit drives me mad.

Of course, there is the whole having to occasionally cause severe damage to one's fellow man, I discovered rather forcefully that it just really isn't my cup of tea. In fact, I've found that after that deployment I'm rather more mellow and less likely to commit violence (not that I was a violent whackjob anyway) than before. In fact, I'll go to great lengths to avoid it.

hmmm, a little vague...
Not sure how that answers the question...
:p

Oh, a smartass.

I'm going to have fun with you.

You can quite your civilian job without being brought up on charges.

You do realize why that is, right? It's not set up that way for no reason at all.

(I'm sure you do, but I just want to check to make sure. You have a habit of being pedantic and utterly hateful towards anything you even remotely disapprove of.)

And the difference between 'as far as I know' and 'I know' is...?

An understanding of English?

Scouts Out!
Enlisted Cav Scout during our first go around in the sandbox. I enjoyed serving, despite observing the institutionalized lunacy of the military. Why did I join? For various reasons, but the main one was that I felt that it was important to subordinate my personal well being to that of a society that I feel is worth preserving and defending. Not a party, not an administration...a society. Either you understand this attitude, and I don't need to explain it further, or you don't and I could never explain it to you. I agree that the military is not for everyone but I also feel that if the only concern you exhibit is for your own narrow self-interest then you have failed as a member of society. I also agree that trying to compare the needs of discipline and obedience inherent in a military organization with the freedoms and laxity in a civilian job is pointless--there are certain realities of combat that would not, and cannot, tolerate the liberties of civilian life and render comparison of the two futile.

GoG: You used the quote: "I'd rather live on my feet than die on my knees".
Apart from mis-quoting (although I will assume that you did so intentionally) you have subsequently prevaricated that you meant "on my knees" as a position of subservience. You are either being disingenuous or are truly ignorant if you pretend that you are not aware that the original intent and meaning of that quote uses "on my knees" as a position of slavish cowardice and that using this particular phrase in the company of soldiers is going to be intentionally insulting and provocative. Using a phrase that you should know would be insulting, then not even having the courage to stand behind your insult is the worst form of cowardice.

If you mean that you are unwilling to put aside your own interests for those of another, say so. If you are morally unwilling to be in a position where you need to take another's life, say so. If you don't want to serve because you oppose the policies that the military is deployed under, say so. If, like TIN, you have the courage to admit cowardice in the face of personal danger, say so. But don't throw out a statement worthy only of a troll, then try to claim innocence and ignorance for what you said.

If, like TIN, you have the courage to admit cowardice in the face of personal danger, say so. But don't throw out a statement worthy only of a troll, then try to claim innocence and ignorance for what you said.

Hey I never said I was a coward - I'm just opposed to killing. If I had to kill to defend friends or family - I would. I'm just not willing to kill because someone else told me to.

Scouts Out!
Enlisted Cav Scout during our first go around in the sandbox. I enjoyed serving, despite observing the institutionalized lunacy of the military. Why did I join? For various reasons, but the main one was that I felt that it was important to subordinate my personal well being to that of a society that I feel is worth preserving and defending. Not a party, not an administration...a society. Either you understand this attitude, and I don't need to explain it further, or you don't and I could never explain it to you. I agree that the military is not for everyone but I also feel that if the only concern you exhibit is for your own narrow self-interest then you have failed as a member of society. I also agree that trying to compare the needs of discipline and obedience inherent in a military organization with the freedoms and laxity in a civilian job is pointless--there are certain realities of combat that would not, and cannot, tolerate the liberties of civilian life and render comparison of the two futile.

GoG: You used the quote: "I'd rather live on my feet than die on my knees".
Apart from mis-quoting (although I will assume that you did so intentionally) you have subsequently prevaricated that you meant "on my knees" as a position of subservience. You are either being disingenuous or are truly ignorant if you pretend that you are not aware that the original intent and meaning of that quote uses "on my knees" as a position of slavish cowardice and that using this particular phrase in the company of soldiers is going to be intentionally insulting and provocative. Using a phrase that you should know would be insulting, then not even having the courage to stand behind your insult is the worst form of cowardice.

If you mean that you are unwilling to put aside your own interests for those of another, say so. If you are morally unwilling to be in a position where you need to take another's life, say so. If you don't want to serve because you oppose the policies that the military is deployed under, say so. If, like TIN, you have the courage to admit cowardice in the face of personal danger, say so. But don't throw out a statement worthy only of a troll, then try to claim innocence and ignorance for what you said.

Dude, this is Gift of God. He KNOWS he's being insulting. He just doesn't care.

If, like TIN, you have the courage to admit cowardice in the face of personal danger, say so. But don't throw out a statement worthy only of a troll, then try to claim innocence and ignorance for what you said.

I don't think you can call anyone a coward who is willing to stand up for their moral beliefs in the face of opposition. Even if those moral beliefs mean not actively fighting. If anything the path of non-violence can require more courage than that of violent action.

I don't think you can call anyone a coward who is willing to stand up for their moral beliefs in the face of opposition. Even if those moral beliefs mean not actively fighting. If anything the path of non-violence can require more courage than that of violent action.

Exactly. I follow the path of the non-aggressive.

I agree with Carthippostan up to the point he seems to misinterpret TIN's pacifism as cowardice.

To be pacificistic does not mean you are a coward. There were conscientious objectors in WW1 who where granted exemption from serving in the Army, and could serve in the civil service, mine coal or be stretcher bearers.

Those who chose to be stretcher bearers went out to the trenches in France, and had to retrieve wounded from No Man's Land, under fire. However they obviously never carried weapons, like the soldiers.

To go out to a battlefield, and do all that, without even a weapon to defend yourself. Now that takes courage.

I never understand that. Why do some people always judge those who will not kill to be cowards? Can they not accept that I simply refuse to kill because it is not my way?

U.S. Navy submariner.

I've been in 10 years and I'm out next August.

I was in the US Navy. I served as an Electronic Warfare Technician aboard USS George Washington. My job was to prevent enemy missiles from hitting the ship. A nice low pressure job. ;)

I picture you standing on the deck with a large stick, thwapping missiles away left, right and centre.
I'm also fairly certain that the partners will never ask me to kill someone.

They might WANT to. But they don't.
They out source that kind of thing.


And on topic, I have never and almost certainly will never be part of the military. My Dad was in the navy for a while, and my uncle still is.

I was in the ATC, and when I hit 16 I went to jointhe Army, but coz of my one kidney they said nay.

Luckeyst escape of my life.

Semper Fi, brother.

To you as well Sir.

I'm trying to enlist in the navy right now.

OK...for the record, I do NOT equate pacifism with cowardice and I have a great amount of respect for people and leaders who hold true to non-violent convictions in the face of violence. While this is not my chosen path, I think that the teachings, examples and philosophies of Ghandi, King and Einstein are just as important in our society as those that advocate more aggressive resistance to those who would repress or destroy us. My statement about TIN's cowardice was taken DIRECTLY from his own post (post #11 in this thread):
I'm quite happy being a coward anyday - at least i'm a coward who can live with himself.
I also respect this statement and the willingness of someone to honestly acknowledge a trait or characteristic that some might perceive as a flaw. I actually have far more respect for a man who avoids a fight out of admitted cowardice than for a man who seeks out an unnecessary fight to "prove" his courage.

That having been said, I mean no disrespect or insult to you or your convictions TIN and if you took it that way I apologize.

Currently trying for the RAF, got fitness test in a few weeks.

No harm was done. There is no need to apologise.

Haven't served, but if I do make aliyah, I would join the Israeli Defense Forces. I'd probably end up in the intelligence branch.

Haven't served, but if I do make aliyah, I would join the Israeli Defense Forces. I'd probably end up in the intelligence branch.

Your knowledge of jew-jitsu will not doubt come in handy.

Who here serves or has served in the military? Give us your country of service, branch, rank, job description, any action you've seen, and why joined it.
Also, if you plan on joining, you can talk about that too.

I'm just curious :)

USAF ROTC Det. 842, C/3C

Only action I've seen so far is PT, but we're going to Camp Bullis in November.

My grandfather was a MSGT for 30 years, served in WWII, Korea and Vietnam.

1. nope no polite chat, but I didn't get court martialed...
2. As far as I know I have never killed anyone.

Let's be clear. I threw the brown person thing in there because it was as absurd as the rest of it. Obviously none of that happened because that's not how the military works.

Again you show that you don't know the meaning of the phrase you used, and thusly you should stop using it.

I have explained what I meant by that phrase. But, you obviously believe that phrase can only have some other meaning. Perhaps you could share that meaning with us?

your complaint was that in the military you have to follow orders, well you have to do that in civilian jobs as well, so the fact that in that sense they are the same has everything do do with this discussion.

You can say no to anything. And worded correctly you can not be court martial. If it is a moral issue your fine, after the incident is over you may have some training and classes over why the order was legal or not legal(and if so you normally get a medal).

Another way is to simply say I do not know how to perform what you request. Someone else will have to do it and there will be trouble. But not a court martial form of trouble since they cant prove what you know or don't know. Depending on what it was you may get a demotion or kicked out from the military. However, being kicked out for stupidity is honorable. Basically what you would face in the civilian world. The only difference is you cant tell your commanding officer" I don't feel like it"

There is a large difference between the level of obedience required in the military as compared to other jobs. In the military, you are trained to obey without questioning. No sergeant woke me up this morning and yelled at me before breakfast. I decided when I ate breakfast, and what I would do today.

Most jobs involve superiors.

So does slavery. Can we then equate slavery with modern employment practices? Obviously not. There are differences between slavery, military life, and civilian life.

That sounds like a policeman.

I would not want to be a police officer either.

No, risking life and limb for a cause which may or may not be believed in.

First of all, I think you're just phrasing what I said differently. If you are risking your life for a cause you may not believe in, then you are basically being asked to risk death for someone else's agenda. Secondly, the nobility of the agenda being pursued does not change the essential nature of the situation. People can die for someone else's freedom as easily as they die for someone else's greed.

Meh

I was addressing GoG's assertion that only in the military do you have to do what you are told, which is patently false.

It is patently false. Just like your claim that I made that assertion.

You do realize why that is, right? It's not set up that way for no reason at all.

(I'm sure you do, but I just want to check to make sure. You have a habit of being pedantic and utterly hateful towards anything you even remotely disapprove of.)

There are valid reasons for most of what the military does. The psychology of warfare and how to train a soldier, and how to get the results you want when turning a civiulian into a soldier must be well known and researched by now. However, the validity of such practices does not change the essential fact that you are being trained to follow orders that may result in your death.

If my boss told me to go do something that may result in my death, I would have the legal recourse (perhaps even an obligation) to stop the project. Soldiers do not have that freedom.

If my boss told me to go do something that may result in my death, I would have the legal recourse (perhaps even an obligation) to stop the project. Soldiers do not have that freedom.

You are correct, because your job description does not include killing people or putting yourself in combat. Soldiers voluntarily take on a job which does include these tasks.

A more accurate analogy would be that you have no more right to refuse to perform a legitimate task that falls squarely within your listed job description than an infantryman has to refuse to assault a bunker when ordered to do so. Both of you can refuse to do the assigned task but both of you will face consequences for this refusal, whether that consequence is being fired or being court marshalled. Because the consequences of the infantryman's refusal carries a higher risk for his co-workers (specifically the risk of their death), the price of his refusal is commensurately greater than yours is for refusing to attend a sales meeting, prepare a legal brief or compile code.

Who here serves or has served in the military? Give us your country of service, branch, rank, job description, any action you've seen, and why joined it.
Also, if you plan on joining, you can talk about that too.
I served my country and community as a paramedic of the German Red Cross for a "tour" of 13 months in the Civillian Service after I got drafted and became a conscientious objector.

I held the equivalent rank of Hauptgefreiter (Private First Class) on my payroll (since conchies fall under military jurisdiction, they receive pay equal to a soldier of the same rank, and should you not show up for your service, the Feldjäger military police will come looking for you...)

I've seen more injured and dead people than any of my friends who did join the military, and the reason I didn't join was that I would not and will not kill people or be instructed to do so. Plus, I only follow orders when they make sense to me.

So, instead of learning how to shoot, maim, and kill - I learned how to save and rescue people. Sounded like a very good alternative to me, I've learned a lot during my service, and I enjoyed serving very much.
I'm just curious :)
Then the military might not be the right place for you - what with the "don't ask don't tell" and such... :eek::$:p

You are correct, because your job description does not include killing people or putting yourself in combat. Soldiers voluntarily take on a job which does include these tasks.

A more accurate analogy would be that you have no more right to refuse to perform a legitimate task that falls squarely within your listed job description than an infantryman has to refuse to assault a bunker when ordered to do so. Both of you can refuse to do the assigned task but both of you will face consequences for this refusal, whether that consequence is being fired or being court marshalled. Because the consequences of the infantryman's refusal carries a higher risk for his co-workers (specifically the risk of their death), the price of his refusal is commensurately greater than yours is for refusing to attend a sales meeting, prepare a legal brief or compile code.

Right.

So..... what's the disagreement over now?

You do realize why that is, right? It's not set up that way for no reason at all.

(I'm sure you do, but I just want to check to make sure. You have a habit of being pedantic and utterly hateful towards anything you even remotely disapprove of.)
Whereas you're just pedantic and hysterical when people 'don't play nice' whilst passively-agressively going after people like me and then apologising for it after?

I don't give a shit why it is set up that way...the obvious flaws in comparing military service to 'any old job' should scream out all on their own to even the dullest among us. That's sort of the point of me mocking the attempted parallel.

I'm also fairly certain that the partners will never ask me to kill someone.

They might WANT to. But they don't.

You do realize why that is, right? It's not set up that way for no reason at all.

(I'm sure you do, but I just want to check to make sure. You have a habit of being pedantic and utterly hateful towards anything you even remotely disapprove of.)

As far as I'm concerned, the only disagreements are over:
-illogical apples-and-oranges comparisons between civilian and military tasks
-a fraudulent assertion of moral superiority based on his ability to refuse to do a task that is outside his job description and would never be asked of him in the first place. And
-an assertion that, unlike a soldier, he could refuse to do tasks that are within his job description without consequence.

Nothing major I suppose...just a little intellectual honesty.

-a fraudulent assertion of moral superiority based on his ability to refuse to do a task that is outside his job description and would never be asked of him in the first place.
I find no moral superiority in his statements. What I did see though was a knee jerk reaction from some members in the military who felt they were being called cowards for obedience.


-an assertion that, unlike a soldier, he could refuse to do tasks that are within his job description without consequence.
I can speak freely in my office (could speak - when I was working).
Soldiers have no such freedom of speech.

What I did see though was a knee jerk reaction from some members in the military who felt they were being called cowards for obedience.
Again...the quote he used was a quote that originally meant cowardice, not obedience. It was a quote that declared moral superiority in the choice of "living (originally: dying) on my feet."
HIS choice of words, HIS choice of a quote, HIS choice to be deliberately insulting. The reaction is not knee jerk, it is a legitimate response--if you don't want to be attacked, don't fire the first shot.


Quote:
-an assertion that, unlike a soldier, he could refuse to do tasks that are within his job description without consequence.

I can speak freely in my office (could speak - when I was working).
Soldiers have no such freedom of speech.

and this freedom you have has what exactly to do with the issue you quoted? Is not speaking freely a part of your job description, yet you do so in flagrant violation of the employment conditions you voluntarily accepted?

Again...the quote he used was a quote that originally meant cowardice, not obedience.
Really? The original quote was "It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees", [Zapata] said at a time when Mexico underwent a revolution. I see nothing in either statement to indicate "cowardice". Only living in servitude.

It was a quote that declared moral superiority in the choice of "living (originally: dying) on my feet."
HIS choice of words, HIS choice of a quote, HIS choice to be deliberately insulting. The reaction is not knee jerk, it is a legitimate response--if you don't want to be attacked, don't fire the first shot.
You see moral superiority. I do not as I do not see the statement indicating cowardice.



and this freedom you have has what exactly to do with the issue you quoted? Is not speaking freely a part of your job description, yet you do so in flagrant violation of the employment conditions you voluntarily accepted?

Simple. I can speak freely without fear of punishment or reprimand. That cannot be said about being a member of the military (some militaries - obviously I'm not using an all encompassing title of 'the military' in this instance)

Again...the quote he used was a quote that originally meant cowardice, not obedience. It was a quote that declared moral superiority in the choice of "living (originally: dying) on my feet."
HIS choice of words, HIS choice of a quote, HIS choice to be deliberately insulting. The reaction is not knee jerk, it is a legitimate response--if you don't want to be attacked, don't fire the first shot.

and this freedom you have has what exactly to do with the issue you quoted? Is not speaking freely a part of your job description, yet you do so in flagrant violation of the employment conditions you voluntarily accepted?

It originally meant cowardice? This is news to me. I guess that's why Dyakovo decided to get offended. I don't think I'm morally superior because of my choice. I don't think it has anything to do with morality at all. I don,t understand why so many people seem to be unable to understand what I meant. especially when one considers that I explained it in my third post in this thread.

Yes. It was my choice to use those words. I did not choose for you or anyone else to get offended. I don't get to choose how you react to things, you do. So if you want be insulted, I would prefer it if you didn't blame me for it.

And if you're going to hide behind that job description argument, I will then simply say that the job description of a soldier's life is to obey and risk death. I choose not to do that because obeying others to that degree, and risking my life for those reasons, does not suit me.

Somehow, this makes me guilty of accusing soldiers of cowardice.

Captain Royal Logistics Corps
11 EOD Regiment
2 Tours of Afghanistan in charge of EOD unit seconded to MERT
1 tour of Iraq as part of EOD unit

GoG:
And if you're going to hide behind that job description argument, I will then simply say that the job description of a soldier's life is to obey and risk death. I choose not to do that because obeying others to that degree, and risking my life for those reasons, does not suit me.
Acknowledging the realities and restrictions of a job is not "hiding behind" anything, however your statement here is one that I might disagree with but can respect. I think, had you originally posted that statement, it might have spared a lot of offense.

Regarding the original quote--Zapata, as a revolutionary, was speaking to the moral righteousness of his cause. His armed rebellion against tyranny, to him, was a morally superior cause and therefore his actions and decisions carried this superiority with them. In this view of a revolutionary, it was the brave and moral thing to risk your life, safety or comfort for resistance and freedom ("to die upon your feet") and it was the servile and cowardly thing to surrender your freedom to a tyrant in exchange for security ("to live upon your knees"). If you choose to interpret this quote differently, it is without understanding the meaning behind the quote in it's personal and historical context.

If you still truly don't understand why this quote, used in this context, offended people who risk/ed their lives in defense of the liberties that you: a) stated you would not be willing to defend yourself, and b) then used to call them slaves or cowards, then I'm not sure how to enlighten you. However, if this was a simple mistake of misinterpreting a quote, or misusing a quote to mean something very different, then so be it and as far as I'm concerned there's no bad blood.

Just understand that those who feel strongly enough to risk their lives for a cause will fight just as strongly in defense of their decision to do so. I oppose drafts and conscription and I would never dream of imposing that decision upon you, but doom on you if you attack (not disagree with, attack) the decision we made.

There are valid reasons for most of what the military does. The psychology of warfare and how to train a soldier, and how to get the results you want when turning a civiulian into a soldier must be well known and researched by now.


Not as well researched as you'd think... and certainly not in terms of the long-term consequences of this (or indeed of service). But then there are a lot of practical issues involved in research on armed forces personnel.

The original quote is "Mejor morir de pie que vivir de rodillas", "Better to die on your feet than live on your knees", Emiliano Zapata.

Taken in the context of the time, it means it's better to stand up to oppression even though it means your death, than live on your knees...serving, obedient, and unquestioning.

GoG changed the words to express his own belief that it's actually more profound to live and live well, than die obediently. I'm sorry your brain can't stretch far enough to understand the subtle difference.

It was pretty fucking clear. Get over yourself.

I mock people for their decisions all the time. You have a PhD in Comparative Basketweaving? Wow, that's the lamest $70,000 I bet you've ever spent!

What, you think that choosing to be in the military is too noble for mockery? Please.

Regarding the original quote--Zapata, as a revolutionary, was speaking to the moral righteousness of his cause. His armed rebellion against tyranny, to him, was a morally superior cause and therefore his actions and decisions carried this superiority with them. In this view of a revolutionary, it was the brave and moral thing to risk your life, safety or comfort for resistance and freedom ("to die upon your feet") and it was the servile and cowardly thing to surrender your freedom to a tyrant in exchange for security ("to live upon your knees"). If you choose to interpret this quote differently, it is without understanding the meaning behind the quote in it's personal and historical context.

I am choosing to interpret and modify this quote while still understanding the meaning behind the quote in its context. By doing so, I create a dialogue that continues from Zapata's rhetoric. By aletring the quote and applying it to the military, it creates questions. Who imposes servility? Who threatens your freedom? Who threatens your security? Is the act of denying your own freedom and security the only way to protect the freedom and security of others? Why do you consider joining an order that risks both your life and freedom to be a moral choice?

Reality is not as simple as Zapata's rousing speech makes it out to be. I don't live in Zapata's idealised revolutionary and romantic world. I live in the real one.

If you still truly don't understand why this quote, used in this context, offended people who risk/ed their lives in defense of the liberties that you: a) stated you would not be willing to defend yourself, and b) then used to call them slaves or cowards, then I'm not sure how to enlighten you. However, if this was a simple mistake of misinterpreting a quote, or misusing a quote to mean something very different, then so be it and as far as I'm concerned there's no bad blood.

Cool. Now I am stating that I am unwilling to defend my own liberties! And calling soldiers slaves and cowards! Awesome! I want to go to this military school where you learn to read all sorts of bullshit into people's words.

Or accuse them of misinterpreting and misusing a quote. Because quotes can only be used one way, apparently.

Not as well researched as you'd think... and certainly not in terms of the long-term consequences of this (or indeed of service). But then there are a lot of practical issues involved in research on armed forces personnel.

I was under the impression that it was researched in terms of arriving at the finished product required ( a human killing machine), rather than researching how such a process would affect the human involved.

What, you think that choosing to be in the military is too noble for mockery? Please.


Everything is open to mockery, yep yep even me! *gasp*

I was under the impression that it was researched in terms of arriving at the finished product required ( a human killing machine), rather than researching how such a process would affect the human involved.

This is indeed my big bugbear about the armed forces.

Not everyone in the military is a "killing machine". I am Air Force medical - and I wouldn't trade that for anything. The major thing I was involved with was Hurricane Katrina, humanitarian mission. I joined mainly because it's what I always what I wanted to do, and its a big part of who I am.

Not everyone in the military is a "killing machine". I am Air Force medical - and I wouldn't trade that for anything. The major thing I was involved with was Hurricane Katrina, humanitarian mission. I joined mainly because it's what I always what I wanted to do, and its a big part of who I am.

Kudos to you. If you don't mind me asking, why did you join the military if you wanted to be a medic/doctor/similar.

Would it not have been equally rewarding joining say, Medecins Sans Frontieres? Something militaristic must have appealed to you.

Bit off topic, but when American soldiers come to Britain do they get little cards telling them what to do and what not to do?

Bit off topic, but when American soldiers come to Britain do they get little cards telling them what to do and what not to do?My father went to Iraq (He's a civilian) and he got a little pamphlet that told him things that he could and couldn't do. Not sure if that applies to military personnel or not, or if it applies to them going to the United Kigndom. Though, since we're allies and all that jazz, I would suppose that there are certain things that soldiers couldn't do.

I served.
Sgt USMC
And I have no problem shooting people. Just have a problem shooting women and children, I lead them too much;)

I don't think you can call anyone a coward who is willing to stand up for their moral beliefs in the face of opposition. Even if those moral beliefs mean not actively fighting. If anything the path of non-violence can require more courage than that of violent action.

Exactly

It originally meant cowardice? This is news to me. I guess that's why Dyakovo decided to get offended.

Yes and Yes

What, you think that choosing to be in the military is too noble for mockery? Please.

No, but I take offense to implications of cowardice, I also take offense to people implying that they are better than me because they made different choices than, a big reason why I rarely respond to you Sin, you irritate the crap out of me with your attitude that somehow you are better than everyone else because you have made the "right" choices.

No, but I take offense to implications of cowardice, I also take offense to people implying that they are better than me because they made different choices than, a big reason why I rarely respond to you Sin, you irritate the crap out of me with your attitude that somehow you are better than everyone else because you have made the "right" choices.


I'm better than you.

At making bannock.

No doubt in my mind.

What would irritate me about you, if I'd ever noticed you before this thread, is you apparent ability to take everything personally, and to, against all evidence to the contrary, insist that your interpretation of someone else's intentions if the correct one.

You have shown that you go out of your way to get offended, pissy, obnoxious and arrogant. That you accuse me of the same gives me some slight hope for your intellectual development, because I am going out of my way to mock you using the very tactics you've displayed here.

Disgusting, isn't it?

Yeah. That's what I thought too.

There are valid reasons for most of what the military does. The psychology of warfare and how to train a soldier, and how to get the results you want when turning a civiulian into a soldier must be well known and researched by now. However, the validity of such practices does not change the essential fact that you are being trained to follow orders that may result in your death.

If my boss told me to go do something that may result in my death, I would have the legal recourse (perhaps even an obligation) to stop the project. Soldiers do not have that freedom.
Okay. Just checking.

Whereas you're just pedantic and hysterical when people 'don't play nice' whilst passively-agressively going after people like me and then apologising for it after?
How mean. :(

I don't give a shit why it is set up that way...the obvious flaws in comparing military service to 'any old job' should scream out all on their own to even the dullest among us. That's sort of the point of me mocking the attempted parallel.
Well, no surprise there.

I was just going to point out that it had to do with a specific sort of discipline necessary for wartime, but eh, nevermind. (Really, I was only pointing it out for the readers.)

Have fun taunting the overly militaristic though. :)(I mean that too. I find the way people get so insulted over people viewing the military the way you do as extremely hilarious.)

Well I'm an anarchist who was a draft resister (and proud of it!) during the Vietnam days. I had friends and acquaintances who went there and they all came back with varying degrees of damage. (By the way, those stories circulated bt the Right of anti-war demonstrators spitting on the wounded as they were being stretchered off are such unmitigated bullshit. Talk about urban myths! The diggers who went to Vietnam were our brothers - often literally! Our message was "bring the boys home - similar to the ones today. Besides, what soldier wouldn't rightly beat a spitter to a pulp if he saw a wounded comrade being spat on?)
However, I joined the army reserve after Prime Minister Whitlam was sacked by the Governor General in what was rightly regarded as a CIA-backed coup. (Marshall Green was this CIA operative used by the States to overthrow regimes believed to be unco-operative - he was in Australia in 74/75, In Chile in 73 and In Indonesia when the army launched a coup on President Soekarno. If Marshall Green is still alive, he'll be drooling out of the side of his mouth in a wheelchair in an old folks home and he ain't gonna coup no more - but there will always be Marshall Green wannabes unfortunately.
Anyway, back to the Monash Uni Regiment - it was okay but it wasn't really me. I did enjoy the camaradrie with my fellow soldiers though. I also think that the army has great education princiles - the army doesn't move on to the next learning objective until the whole platoon has mastered the present objective. The leads to soldiers helping each other. They kicked we out when I had a fight with a right-wing student politician at university. I had clearly brought shame upon the regiment. (Too violent for the army? Now there is an irony!), I have a soft side. When I returned from a two-week camp at Puckapunyal (an army traing canp in Central, Victoria, Australia) I found out that muy little black cat had miscarried. I picked her up, buried my head in her fur and cried!

ANTHEM1 FOR DOOMED YOUTH
A

What passing-bells2 for these who die as cattle?
Only the monstrous anger of the guns.
Only the stuttering rifles' rapid rattle
Can patter out3 their hasty orisons.4
No mockeries5 now for them; no prayers nor bells;
Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs, –
The shrill, demented6 choirs of wailing shells;
And bugles7 calling for them from sad shires.8
What candles9 may be held to speed them all?
Not in the hands of boys but in their eyes
Shall shine the holy glimmers of goodbyes.
The pallor10 of girls' brows shall be their pall;
Their flowers the tenderness of patient minds,
And each slow dusk11 a drawing-down of blinds.12 A

September - October, 1917

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes for students
1 Anthem - perhaps best known in the expression "The National Anthem;" also, an important religious song (often expressing joy); here, perhaps, a solemn song of celebration
2 passing-bells - a bell tolled after someone's death to announce the death to the world
3 patter out - rapidly speak
4 orisons - prayers, here funeral prayers
5 mockeries - ceremonies which are insults. Here Owen seems to be suggesting that the Christian religion, with its loving God, can have nothing to do with the deaths of so many thousands of men
6 demented - raving mad
7 bugles - a bugle is played at military funerals (sounding the last post)
8 shires - English counties and countryside from which so many of the soldiers came
9 candles - church candles, or the candles lit in the room where a body lies in a coffin
10 pallor - paleness
11 dusk has a symbolic significance here
12 drawing-down of blinds - normally a preparation for night, but also, here, the tradition of drawing the blinds in a room where a dead person lies, as a sign to the world and as a mark of respect. The coming of night is like the drawing down of blinds.

If my boss told me to go do something that may result in my death, I would have the legal recourse (perhaps even an obligation) to stop the project. Soldiers do not have that freedom.

So you have legal recourse supporting you doing something which is not in your job description. The risk of life and limb is part and parcel of the job of being a soldier.
What legal recourse do you have to refusing to do something which is a requirement of your job?

Here, I'll answer that one for you since you seem to have grown rather dense in the couple of months I've been away: You don't have any.

It's simple, if you refuse to do your job, you will lose your job. It doesn't matter whether it is a civilian job or a military one the basic consequences are the same. Granted, in the military there is a chance of the consequences of refusing to do your job being more than just losing your job, such as court martial, but they are not automatic.

For those of you who have never been in the military who are saying that military and civilian jobs shouldn't be compared, that just proves how little you know about the military.
I was in the military, I am not now and it has over 15 years since I was in so I am quite familiar with both civilian jobs and the military.

Dyakovo, I can think of legal protections for a person refusing to carry out an instruction by an employer - if the instruction is illegal or unethical e.g. "I want you to spy on your workmates".
I had a friend who was working for Nissan Cars in the 70s in Australia who was approached by a boss and asked to do this.
I would have told the boss to get stuffed but my friend carefully collected information about the boss's 'requests'. When he had enough proof, he went to the union and that boss was sacked.
I actually strongly believe that the military should have unions. Obviously the "right to strike" issue needs to be worked through. Personally I support the principal.
Long live the Kronstadt sailors!

Dyakovo, I can think of legal protections for a person refusing to carry out an instruction by an employer - if the instruction is illegal or unethical e.g. "I want you to spy on your workmates".
I had a friend who was working for Nissan Cars in the 70s in Australia who was approached by a boss and asked to do this.
I would have told the boss to get stuffed but my friend carefully collected information about the boss's 'requests'. When he had enough proof, he went to the union and that boss was sacked.
I actually strongly believe that the military should have unions. Obviously the "right to strike" issue needs to be worked through. Personally I support the principal.
Long live the Kronstadt sailors!

And those same legal protections exist for soldiers, there are not any, however, for refusing to do what your job entails.
In the U.S. military you are required to refuse illegal orders.

Here's a site for you all to peruse... (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm)

How mean. :( Yeah, you were Mr. Sweetness and Light, and that totally came out of nowhere.
]
Well, no surprise there.

I was just going to point out that it had to do with a specific sort of discipline necessary for wartime, but eh, nevermind. (Really, I was only pointing it out for the readers.)

Have fun taunting the overly militaristic though. :)(I mean that too. I find the way people get so insulted over people viewing the military the way you do as extremely hilarious.)
You know what's really nuts? I haven't even actually stated my position on the military once in this thread.

And those same legal protections exist for soldiers, there are not any, however, for refusing to do what your job entails.
In the U.S. military you are required to refuse illegal orders.

Here's a site for you all to peruse... (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm)
Way to deliberately conflate the issue.

No civilian job will require you to die, or to kill other human beings.

That is the obvious and fundamental reason you can never, ever compare the military to civilian employment.

Way to deliberately conflate the issue.

No civilian job will require you to die, or to kill other human beings.

That is the obvious and fundamental reason you can never, ever compare the military to civilian employment.

Not directly, no. But there are plenty of civilian jobs where you certainly make it easier for others to die, even if personally do not shoot them.

Not directly, no. But there are plenty of civilian jobs where you certainly make it easier for others to die, even if personally do not shoot them.

Like?

Like?

Like legislator or executive directing actions of military. A more common example would be anyone involved with security.
There are also plenty of professions one could claim "promote death" (tobacco sellers, defense contractors, etc.), although that seems withdrawn from the actual harm, and any blame is dissipated among so many people, I'm not really sure you could claim they are required to kill people.

For those of you who have never been in the military who are saying that military and civilian jobs shouldn't be compared, that just proves how little you know about the military.

I was in the military. I don't think the military and civilian jobs should be compared.

But then again, I also understood what GoG was saying on his post on the first page. (Even if I'd have liked him to say "risk dying on my knees", but that's just me :tongue: )

There is a large difference between the level of obedience required in the military as compared to other jobs. In the military, you are trained to obey without questioning. No sergeant woke me up this morning and yelled at me before breakfast. I decided when I ate breakfast, and what I would do today.

No one yelled at me to wake up after Basic. I had 1 bedroom apartment with a living room all to myself and I woke up with an Alarm clock. I could eat waht ever I Choose and do what I want in the morning before work. actually I ate at work because the last 3 years I was pulling 12 hour shifts, the site had a nice kitchen just for that purpose.


I would not want to be a police officer either.

There are valid reasons for most of what the military does. The psychology of warfare and how to train a soldier, and how to get the results you want when turning a civiulian into a soldier must be well known and researched by now. However, the validity of such practices does not change the essential fact that you are being trained to follow orders that may result in your death.

You completely misunderstand the purpose of orders and training.
By being in the military I have chosen a job that may well put me in a war zone. the Training the orders are there to increase the survival rate of the group as a whole. Also once your in the shit someone being no responsive to orders is attributed to dramatic stress(battle fatigue, shell shock in past wars). In the immediate aftermath someone else will simply follow the orders, and later on down the road that person is evacuated from the front to the hospital. There is no shame in this and no legal action against the solider.

More over there is a whole host of legal action to avoid getting deployed to a war zone. The most common being a declination statement. where you decline your next duty assignment.
[/quote]

If my boss told me to go do something that may result in my death, I would have the legal recourse (perhaps even an obligation) to stop the project. Soldiers do not have that freedom.[/QUOTE]


Turn on history Channel. Ice road truckers, Loggers, those arctic fishing shows. those are all three jobs that put the workers at risk. People choose to do them, because the benefits out weigh the risk in their mind. In fact the three jobs are statistically more dangerous then military service.

Yeah, you were Mr. Sweetness and Light, and that totally came out of nowhere.
:(

You know what's really nuts? I haven't even actually stated my position on the military once in this thread.
I know.

No civilian job will require you to die, or to kill other human beings.

That is the obvious and fundamental reason you can never, ever compare the military to civilian employment.
While I agree on the sentiment, there are some jobs that increase the chance of you being killed while pursuing your profession, high on the list are firemen and policemen, I'd say. And part of the job as a police officer can require you to kill others when all else fails.

However, I wouldn't compare those fields of employment with becoming a soldier.

Way to deliberately conflate the issue.

No civilian job will require you to die, or to kill other human beings.

That is the obvious and fundamental reason you can never, ever compare the military to civilian employment.

there are several civilian jobs with a higher risk of death then military service. Logging, fishing, ice road truckers. just watch the history channel.

Killing. what importance ? Is it not the reason behind the killing that is important ? In the vast majority of situation in the military you are protecting yourself , your comrades, or innocent civilians when using lethal force. Almost always if you were to encounter a similar situation in civilian life you could legally respond with lethal force as well.

The Use of lethal force is about the situation not the employer. There is no license to kill at will in the military, and those who do so will be punished if caught.

I'm thirteen so not yet. However once I'm 18, I'm gonna have to go to the Defence Forces. I hope I can get to the Air Force. That would be cool.

I LOVE how everyone seems to think that the only thing the military does is kill people!
I mean, they completely ignore how military surgeons and medics go into towns to treat the injured and sick, Search and Rescue missions, reconstruction after hurricanes and other natural disasters, Hurricanes Ike and Katrina are two examples of all of those.
Right now US Marines and soldiers are working in many of Iraq's cities training police forces, and at times, acting as a police force.
And in the military, you DO get to choose your job. If you're a mechanic you're not going to be sent to kill/die unless you volunteer or something catastrophic happened and you're the last person left.

If you're a mechanic you're not going to be sent to kill/die unless you volunteer or something catastrophic happened and you're the last person left.

Which is why my gunner, who signed up as a fueler (the guy who pumps gas and drives the fuel truck), is assigned to a cavalry platoon as a gunner, right?

Four words, "Needs of the Army".

I'm thirteen so not yet. However once I'm 18, I'm gonna have to go to the Defence Forces. I hope I can get to the Air Force. That would be cool.

...

...

It's explaining time! In ''cool'' I mean it would be cool to pilot a fighter, not to shoot down other planes.

It's explaining time! In ''cool'' I mean it would be cool to pilot a fighter, not to shoot down other planes.

you want to fly you need to be an officer. To be an officer you need to be have a college degree. something about the military being more trusting with billion dollar planes to people with degrees. The one exception is the army helicopter aviation. Not as fun as fighter pilots. not to mention more dangerous.

How is your eye sight ?
if it is not 20/20 Be certain to get laser corrective surgery before you take your medical exam. And DO NOT disclose it. The military has no way to find out, and you should be fine. Just my advice to help you live your dream.

you want to fly you need to be an officer. To be an officer you need to be have a college degree. something about the military being more trusting with billion dollar planes to people with degrees. The one exception is the army helicopter aviation. Not as fun as fighter pilots. not to mention more dangerous.

How is your eye sight ?
if it is not 20/20 Be certain to get laser corrective surgery before you take your medical exam. And DO NOT disclose it. The military has no way to find out, and you should be fine. Just my advice to help you live your dream.
Hold on. I gotta be an officer so I could be in a plane? Remember these are the F-18Cs were talking about, not some ultra high tech F-22. And Remember: Finland has conscription.

Hold on. I gotta be an officer so I could be in a plane?

to fly a fixed winged aircraft. yes. helicopter you can get away with being a warrant officer. fighter pilots are normally one or two seater. So i am assuming you want to be a pilot.
here a WIKI how to
http://www.wikihow.com/Become-an-Air-Force-Pilot

to fly a fixed winged aircraft. yes. helicopter you can get away with being a warrant officer. fighter pilots are normally one or two seater. So i am assuming you want to be a pilot.
here a WIKI how to
http://www.wikihow.com/Become-an-Air-Force-Pilot
It says there that it will be only useful for the USAF. Not the Finnish Air Force(FAF)

It says there that it will be only useful for the USAF. Not the Finnish Air Force(FAF)

opps my bad. though i am willing to guess Finland has something similar. likely has to do with not trusting an 18 yr old fresh out of high school with the ability to sink a ship with a trigger pull.

opps my bad. though i am willing to guess Finland has something similar. likely has to do with not trusting an 18 yr old fresh out of high school with the ability to sink a ship with a trigger pull.

Only have weapons against aircraft.

Only have weapons against aircraft.

right now the principle aircraft in the Finnish Air force is the F/A 18 hornet which is a multi role fighter. which means attacking targets on land and sea will be in your training and ordinance.

The next most common craft is the BAE hawk which is a British trainer. Only 149 active aircraft for 3,100 personnel. my guess is it is hard as hell to get to be a pilot and I would highly recommend a college degree otherwise your most likely to become a Mechanic.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Air_Force

Hold on. I gotta be an officer so I could be in a plane? Remember these are the F-18Cs were talking about, not some ultra high tech F-22. And Remember: Finland has conscription.
Dude, the compulsory service is a year or less. They won't let you anywhere near a plane with that little training.

Think at least 6 weeks basic training to start with: how to clean your shoes, how to get them dirty again, how to clean a gun, how to get it dirty again, etc etc. Then a few more weeks more specific training for the part of the military you're serving in.

Fighter pilots have to be in top shape physically and mentally. They need enormous amounts of theoretical training on how the plane works, tactics and so on. Hence why in the USAF that part of the program takes more than a year - and in the Finnish air force it will be similar.

If you want to be a pilot, by all means go for it - but you'll have to sign up properly for many years if you really want to. They're not about to waste hundreds of thousands on training you if you're just going to stay for two or three years. One of the main reason pilots are officers is precisely because that way they're guaranteed to stick around and make this their life-long career.

And the same goes for all the other fun bits, by the way. Conscripts won't become paratroopers, tank commanders, snipers and so on.

right now the principle aircraft in the Finnish Air force is the F/A 18 hornet which is a multi role fighter. which means attacking targets on land and sea will be in your training and ordinance.

The next most common craft is the BAE hawk which is a British trainer. Only 149 active aircraft for 3,100 personnel. my guess is it is hard as hell to get to be a pilot and I would highly recommend a college degree otherwise your most likely to become a Mechanic.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Air_Force
It's the F-18 Hornet. Same plane but without the air-to-ground capability. Right now their modernising them, but the last one will come out of Patria in 2015.

I would join the military, sadly i suffer from crippling cowardess and lazyness.
But i feel proud to watch people go off to die...and kill... for their country.

Despite the fact i'm a massive pacifist and would prefer the army just go around building roads and hospitals and stuff

And in the military, you DO get to choose your job. If you're a mechanic you're not going to be sent to kill/die unless you volunteer or something catastrophic happened and you're the last person left.

This is not true. What role you play is dictated by the unit you're in and what their job is in combat. My cousin was a mechanic and according to him he got sent on a lot of convoys. He supposedly killed a few people with the 50 cal and had a few IEDs hit his convoy (he could be trying to inflate some stories but maybe not). As an intel intel analyst my job was strictly computer work. I only left the FOB a few times. Other people in my company though got attached to other units and left the FOB everyday. It all depends. I would advise anyone thinking about joining the military to do some good research and don't buy the bull the recruiters try to sell.

left school and went into the army as a combat medic (I was supposed to join the RM *sigh*) switched to the TA as an infantryman mostly because its local but now because it is insane

why I walked into that career office:


its an amazing drug
respect from myself and others
to do something with my life beyond getting pissed outside ASDA/threatening the elderly
what else am I going to do? seriously


I'm not going out giving my rank and such because thats stupid

I don't know about the US but in the UK the drinks in the mess are stupidly cheap, go buy some.

I paid £4.50 for a jack and coke :mad:

where is this magic cheap alchohol land?

I picture you standing on the deck with a large stick, thwapping missiles away left, right and centre

Eerily accurate. :p

This is not true. What role you play is dictated by the unit you're in and what their job is in combat. My cousin was a mechanic and according to him he got sent on a lot of convoys. He supposedly killed a few people with the 50 cal and had a few IEDs hit his convoy (he could be trying to inflate some stories but maybe not). As an intel intel analyst my job was strictly computer work. I only left the FOB a few times. Other people in my company though got attached to other units and left the FOB everyday. It all depends. I would advise anyone thinking about joining the military to do some good research and don't buy the bull the recruiters try to sell.Since I actually intend to go into a combat-oriented MOS, I'm not very concerned about being re-assigned to another combat-oriented MOS. But that might just be me being weird. :$

Fighter pilots have to be in top shape physically and mentally. They need enormous amounts of theoretical training on how the plane works, tactics and so on. Hence why in the USAF that part of the program takes more than a year - and in the Finnish air force it will be similar.

If you want to be a pilot, by all means go for it - but you'll have to sign up properly for many years if you really want to. They're not about to waste hundreds of thousands on training you if you're just going to stay for two or three years. One of the main reason pilots are officers is precisely because that way they're guaranteed to stick around and make this their life-long career.

And the same goes for all the other fun bits, by the way. Conscripts won't become paratroopers, tank commanders, snipers and so on.
Ah, but the payoff comes with the practical applications of all that training. There is no job more fun in all of the armed services than one that lets you take a fast jet out for two hours of unsupervised recreation.

As you say, the obligations are much longer than they used to be. I think I've heard of up to 9? year obligations after flight school? When I got my wings, the obligation was only 4 years and the Marine Corp even cut some of those short.

Eerily accurate. :p

My spies are everywhere.

I paid £4.50 for a jack and coke :mad:

where is this magic cheap alchohol land?

It was 85p a pint in our other ranks mess.

Never bothered with spirits.

I'm going to join the dutch armed forces, probable as an infantryman by the mechanised infantry. Currently doing gymnasium 5th year. Would like to do the officer training.

6 years active US Navy. Avionics Calibration
3 yrs Army Natl Guard. Air Defense Artillery
4 yrs and going Army Reserve. Admin.

It was 85p a pint in our other ranks mess.

Never bothered with spirits.

and you still think thats cheap. ?!?!?! my freind come to the US and let me introduce you to something we call quarter night. half pints for 25 cents.
so a pint is 50 cents. with today's exchange rates that would be like paying 25 cents for a pint. and this one bar does bring your own cup night. and no matter how big of a cup you bring it takes 50 cents to fill it up. I have a special quart mug just for the occasion.